« New (Media) Pre-Jac City | Main | Wilmington On Pollack »
May 27, 2008
The Nikki Finke Effect
I guess we've now gotten to the point where Nikki Finke is going to desperately try to spin her gossip blog into a new source. As usual, her spin is self-referential and utterly self-serving. And as it is so often... a load of crap.
At least, partially.
And this is how the truly great liars make their lies seem truthful.
Today, Nikki explains “How Reputable Reporters Screwed Up.” The bulk of the blog entry is about the comment left on Nikki’s self-vetted comments pages by “A CAA Agent”… an amusing rant about a star’s ego run amuck and an agency’s overreach in trying to keep him in their pen. Maybe it was real… maybe it was simply what felt like insight but was not actually from a CAA agent. This is why people read Finke’s blog. They aren’t looking for facts, they are looking for entertainment.
But as Nikki vainly recounts the repetition of this comment, she never points out a couple of facts.
1. In the month and a half that this story floated around Hollywood as fact (how many times have I pointed out that this is a web comment and should not be assumed to be real, even if it makes sense), Nikki never called out the comment as potentially false. Instead, she sucked up all the post-strike publicity she could get.
2. Nikki positioned herself as the arbiter of comment legitimacy from the first day she started taking and arrogantly vetting comments for her blog. To wit:
“A week ago, DHD began allowing comments for the first time in its brief 20-month history. (I started DHD in time for the Oscars on March 3, 2006.) I wanted to provide a forum to express your strike opinions, rants, sorrows. In order for a comment to post, I have to approve it first. You see, I own this website so everyone has to play by my rules.
If you don't see your comment right away, it's because a) I'm busy, b) I'm asleep, or c) I deleted it. I want to present both sides, so don't expect me to just post "pro" or just post "con". But I also won't post comments that are virtually word-for-word repetitions of other approved comments (as if some group is trying to manipulate insiders' opinions.)
Keep it pithy, or I'll delete. (I mean it: be briefer!) Stay on topic, or I'll delete. Be intelligent, or I'll delete. Don't attack anyone personally, or I'll delete. Don't be racist or sexist or any other stupid "ist", or I'll delete. Don't impersonate Jeff Berg or Steven Spielberg or Barry Meyer, or I'll delete. (I'm now verifying comments "signed" by well-known names before I'll approve them.) Don't make wild unsubstantiated claims, or I'll delete.”
So… Nikki wants to set herself up as legit. She set herself up as the one who determines whether comments on her site are legitimate. And she let the comment be talked about endlessly for more than a month before suddenly spinning on her heels and using it as ammo against other journalists.
Still, she is right. None of those people – Stu VanArsdale, Anne Thompson, Patrick Goldstein, and Kim Masters – had any business referring to this comment on Nikki’s blog as anything more an amusing, anonymous comment… because Nikki is not terribly concerned about accuracy, journalism, or doing the right thing. She is primarily interested in building her image and self-image and anything that supports that effort is given lots of ink and anything that doesn’t is attacked, often in private, often with excessive, salacious lies.
So over a month later, what is Nikki’s motive to bring this up now? Well, look at who is complaining… “one CAA partner… especially outraged over Goldstein's inaccuracy”
So you get to know that she spoke to a CAA partner and that he came to Nikki for relief. What Nikki genuinely seems unable to comprehend is that that CAA partner is using Nikki to attack Patrick Goldstein anonymously (being that he was obviously more upset about Patrick picking it up than Nikki letting it run in the first place) and to deny the veracity of the piece without putting himself on the line, since, of course, he can’t have the slightest idea whether the comment was actually from one of his employees or not.
And as a bonus, the hack most likely to make us all look like hacks gets to take a swipe at Anne, Kim, Patrick… all long-time competition, even pointing to Patrick's potential daily blogging in direct competiton with Nikki (an idea I've been advocating for years)… and also at Stu VanArsdale who is daring to report gossip on agents – Nikki’s main beat and a subject that bores me to death – at Defamer… a self-acknowledged gossip rag.
But what Nikki never did, never does, and is unlikely ever to do is to take responsibility for her actions. Unlike my blog or most others, Nikki personally approves the comments that go up on her site, and therefore, has direct editorial responsibility for it. (And on my blog, were something like that to turn up, I would loudly point out the fact that the legitimacy of the author's employment was in question from the first day it ran. For the record, this blog has never held comments for approval. for better or for worse. I can take the heat and I prefer to treat those who read this blog - even the yahoos - like adults.)
Not a single one of the people who Nikki takes on in her blog entry has not been taken on by yours truly at various times. A least one of the people has felt so damaged by me that they have taken out their pain on me professionally. (No one as nastily or dishonestly as Nikki has.) Still... it takes a huge set of girl-balls to be the source of the gossip and then to complain and claim to have the high ground when others follow in kind. The standards for accuracy in industry coverage have become to low at media outlets high and low. But if anything, this is not the work of well-intended and often stunningly earnest writers like the ones Nikki is attacking today. If there is any proper name for it, it is The Nikki Finke Effect.
"Anyone can claim to be whoever they want on the Internet. The blurring of it all is astounding, anonymous comments cited as sources. Everybody is so damn desperate to be relevant and beat the Internet that it's making good journalists betray themselves."
Yes. And malicious, single-sourcing, buyable-by-access hacks like Nikki Finke too.
Posted by poland at May 27, 2008 03:31 PM
Comments
So...how do you REALLY feel about Nikki?
Posted by: doug r ![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.mcnblogs.com/thehotblog/nav-commenters.gif)
at May 27, 2008 05:30 PM
Ay, that's the rub.
No matter how many facts you throw, all anyone ever notices is the mud.
Posted by: David Poland at May 27, 2008 05:41 PM
Who really cares about this petty shit? Finke is a loathsome cunt with a keyboard. We get it. She gets all the heat. You are jealous of it but feel warm by basking in moral high ground.
DP when I read these Finke slapdowns I imagine a high pitched whine escaping your pursed lips. Be happy that you're liked and respected in certain circles. If you want to get heat - be Davez Hilton and draw fucking white scribbles on photos of the new hollywood babylonians.
Posted by: Jeffrey Boam's Doctor at May 27, 2008 07:12 PM
::applauds::
Well said.
Posted by: TVJunkie at May 27, 2008 07:15 PM
I've been reading this blog (and The Hot Button, and everything on the old TNT website...) for years and finally decided to sign up. My main reason: I actually went to Nikki Finke's blog for the first time two days ago. Long story short, I thought I stumbled onto something straight from "The Onion" at first.
If I can figure out how truly ridiculous her page is at first glance (and I am far from an industry expert, "casual observer" would describe it best) it puzzles me how anyone could consider anything on Nikki's page even remotely close to journalism.
What I'm left wondering: does she actually truly believe that what she does on her blog has any journalistic value? I'd rather go with the idea that she's trying to play a giant practical joke on everyone she suckers into believing she's providing "news"...
Posted by: ThatAutGuy at May 27, 2008 09:12 PM
JBD... assign whatever crap you like to me.
I feel compelled to speak the truth. People know it. People look past it.
Like you say, if I wanted the kind of heat Nikki gets, I would do some of that dumb shit. Any of the people she mentioned and many others could.
I know you don't care about the degrading of this profession... but I do.
Might I suggest that all you listen for is high pitched whines... prefer them... are amused by them...
Someone has to say these things. I've been doing it for a long time... what respect I have doesn't come from hiding from real issues... and the destruction of journalistic standards is dead on real. Sorry... but it is.
If you want to see an important discussion of this, get your hands on Costas Now from HBO, which discusses this all, not just about the web, but about all areas of media... in that case, sports media. Everything said there is true of movie journalism... only there is no Costas.
Posted by: David Poland at May 27, 2008 09:18 PM
A sting operation, no Dave? Everyone appreciates your reportage, keep up the good fight, so they and we keep on our toes.
Posted by: T. Holly at May 27, 2008 11:09 PM
I read that blog post that contained the CAA agent's rant. All I have to add is that like another poster in that comment thread I loved Stardust. Saw it on video and thought it was one of the top movies I saw last year. I'm noticing an increasing trend that these companies couldn't cut a trailer to save their lives.. Uhh how about telling us what the movie is about and mentioning the elements. I had no desire to see Speedracer but I dare you tell me what it was about from the trailer. Stardust was the same although it was poor casting not to have someone more recognizable as the male lead.
Posted by: tfresca at May 28, 2008 09:39 AM
Post a comment
Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)
(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)